A majority of Texans don’t want this state wide wall. We certainly wouldn’t appreciate the federal government declaring imminent domain over our private and state land to satisfy Trump’s vanity project. We have walls/fences at all major border crossings where it matters.

Maybe he should build a wall around PA, OH and WV – keep all those yankee redneck MAGA’s safe from scary taco trucks, yardmen and maids.

It goes without saying that if Obama had floated this national emergency bullshit or shut down the government over, say, climate change or health care disagreements, republicans would have their hair on fire and would be filing impeachment papers tomorrow.

Trump gave a very unpresidential political stunt speech. He gave no reason for why he continues to keep the government shut down. The only crisis is the humanitarian one he created which he wants us to pay for. He suggested the sumber of illegals crossing the border is swelling when the number has been falling steadily since 2000. He suggested immigrants are responsible for nearly all the crime in the US when native born are by far more criminal then immigrants. He suggested a wall would stop opiates coming into the country when most come through legal points of entry. He suggested immigrants are taking jobs but omitted they are jobs nobody else wants to do. He suggested the wall would soon pay for itself by reducing drug use which is laughable.

He almost demanded democrats meet with him and agree to his terms. He thinks he is a dictator not president. He speaks with scarface diction. He was plopped behind a desk and had a pouty face. There were so many lies that you lost count of them. It was an ugly and anti-immigrant speech delivered by somebody who knows he is on the losing side. People without paychecks and everyone else should be angry by the guy who made up a crisis and wants everyone else to pay for his incompetence.

Both of you may your lives be blessed that no one in your families ever suffer the disease of addiction.

What you advocate for is the continuation of death in a year greater than all the people we lost in Vietnam.

An in-depth analysis of 2016 U.S. drug overdose data shows that America’s overdose epidemic is spreading geographically and increasing across demographic groups. The report, from researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), appears in today’s issue of MMWR.

Drug overdoses killed 63,632 Americans in 2016. Nearly two-thirds of these deaths (66%) involved a prescription or illicit opioid. Overdose deaths increased in all categories of drugs examined for men and women, people ages 15 and older, all races and ethnicities, and across all levels of urbanization.

CDC’s new analysis confirms that recent increases in drug overdose deaths are driven by continued sharp increases in deaths involving synthetic opioids other than methadone, such as illicitly manufactured fentanyl (IMF).

90% of those drugs come from across the southern border I could care less if poncho wants pick lettuce or drive nails. I care about 64,000 Americans a year dying from street narcotics primarily south american heroin.

I care about the families and the lives of the shattered who watched a child literally fade to death before them and having to witnessed the depths of hell each of those addicted descended into before they died.

Even if a wall lessened that by 10% it would be worth every penny times 10, and it will reduce the death rate much more than 10%.

Each of you against a wall have the death of someones child on your hands…. just to spite Trump.

Building the wall has been Trump’s appeal to those who would refer to Mexicans as Pancho (and who have the intelligence level to write poncho). Heroin comes into the US mostly through legal points of entry. It won’t be dignificantly altered by a wall.

A wall alone cannot stop the flow of drugs into the United States,” Christopher Wilson, deputy director of the Mexico Institute at the Wilson Center, previously told me. “If we’re talking about a broader increase in border security, there could be some — probably minor — implications for the overall numbers of drugs being trafficked. But history shows us that border enforcement has been much more effective at changing the when and where of drugs being brought into the United States rather than the overall amount of drugs being brought into the United States.”

All of that is to say that while Trump’s wall may be many things, there’s wide agreement among experts and in the empirical research that it won’t do much, if anything, to halt illegal drug trafficking. Drug trafficking organizations just have too much of a financial incentive — from the hundreds of billions they make in the illegal drug trade — to let a wall stand in their way, so they’ll come up with solutions, from ice cream trucks to submarines, to overcome any barriers to those profits.

Even if a wall lessened that by 10% it would be worth every penny times 10, and it will reduce the death rate much more than 10%.

Each of you against a wall have the death of someones child on your hands…. just to spite Trump.

Your souls have been tainted.

Emotive nonsense Patrick, which makes your argument for the wall weaker, not stronger.
As I pointed out before, the wall will have zero effect on the flow of drugs. Drug smugglers just take the easiest route. If the wall is built they’ll just find another way to get the drugs to the US. Your country is huge, and there are thousands and thousands of ways to get the drugs in. Now with a country on the face of the planet has stopped the flow of drugs even with the best border control.
the only difference is usually expensive war might make is that it may, reduce the flow of immigrants.

“90% of those drugs come from across the southern border I could care less if poncho wants pick lettuce or drive nails. I care about 64,000 Americans a year dying from street narcotics primarily south american heroin.

I care about the families and the lives of the shattered who watched a child literally fade to death before them and having to witnessed the depths of hell each of those addicted descended into before they died.

Even if a wall lessened that by 10% it would be worth every penny times 10, and it will reduce the death rate much more than 10%.”

Firstly aside from your clear, unadulterated racism as shown in that comment, the remainder of it is also bollocks.

Firstly drugs come in because Americans desire drugs. It isn’t a supply problem it is a demand problem. As long as there is a demand there will be a supply. Cut that supply off from crossing the border and you will simply re-route it. Cut off the second route and you will re-route it. Cut of the third route and you will re-route it. And so on and so on.

Secondly, the majority of the drugs being brought through the southern border are being brought through legal entry points – which will still remain even when if the wall is built. Thus (likely speaking) the wall will have a negligible impact on the movement of drugs into the United States. Either they will continue to bring them in through the legal points of entry (and even should that be closed they will find a way to bring them in).

Thirdly the major cause for drug deaths in the United States is synthetic opioids like fentanyl, which is not primarily being smuggled through the southern border.

So for all your hysterical whinging you have again not made any salient point for the construction of the border wall. Other than your dear glorious leader (peace be upon him) wants one. And what Master wants Master gets.

Is ” poncho ” as a racist term something that Patrick invented yesterday?

I’ve never heard of it!

I am familiar with the other racist terms that the Knights of the Keyboard here have used against Mexicans over the years.

—

I agree with the multiple comments on the non-effectiveness of a wall in significantly reducing drugs flows

You can’t say it often enough for these guys so I will restate that large amounts of drugs comes

a) via domestic production – meth and marijuana
b) in the US mail – fentanyl mailed in from China
c) hidden in containers among legal trade items that pass through legitimate border crossings from Mexico to US , or in hidden compartments in autos making those crossings, etc
d) hidden inside the estimated 12 million shipping containers that are offloaded in the many US seaports every year

Plus a million other ways.

—

The US has higher legal/illegal opiate use than many other countries.

Yes, our problem is a demand problem, not a supply problem. If you offered me some heroin, I wouldn’t take it, but I might break your jaw before reporting you to the police.

Why have so many Americans become so addicted? Among the reasons, bad law and bad medical custom. Mexicans aren’t forcing anyone in Chicago to take drugs.

Not Poncho, Pancho. Pancho is a hispanic name (a diminutive of Francisco). Its most famous holder was a Mexican revolutionary Francisco Villa – Pancho Villa – and has, at times, become a wider term for Mexicans (especially those who cross the border as Pancho Villa led a series of raids during the Mexican Revolution in the 1910s against the United States).

It is probably similar to calling an Irish person Paddy, Mick or Taig – all based of names common in Ireland – Patirck, Michael and Tadhg.

Just as the technology business became known for the relative youth of its executives—valuing skill over experience—Clemson typifies the sport’s growing embrace of quarterbacks straight out of high school.

“There’s kind of a shift towards that, especially on the West Coast, kind of away from the traditional guy who was an intern and then worked for 55 years and now he’s a CEO at age 100,” said Alabama offensive lineman Jonah Williams, a California native. “I think football is the same way.”

Lawrence’s performance came one year after Tua Tagovailoa, then a true freshman, came off the bench to lead Alabama to a comeback win in the national title game against Georgia. And it was aided by some spectacular catches from another true freshman, Justyn Ross, who had one touchdown grab and 153 receiving yards. (Unlike “redshirt” freshmen—sophomores in their first year of play—true freshmen are in their first academic year.)

Ross was an even more recent arrival in the college ranks, coming to Clemson in June after graduating from high school in the spring. “I did not expect to play this type of role for such a dominant team,” he said.

I’ve never heard ” pancho ” as a derogatory term from Anglos to Mexicans, and I don’t see any references to it on Al Gore’s internet either. I think that you guys have concocted a brand new urban legend, as midwifed by the sage of Pennsylvania.

Ultimately the use of things like data analytics (originally a business creation) have massively invaded sports. So it shouldn’t be a surprise that other business models start creeping in at times.

A true freshman quarterback winning the National Championship however is a major shock. While certainly talent should be valued in sports over experience the people who normally win Championships have a big combination of both.

What’s more surprising about Lawrence is that he doesn’t play like a freshman. A lot of younger Quarterbacks (throughout college and even into their NFL careers) make a lot of plays because they have fantastic athleticism and great arm strength. Their superior athleticism just makes stuff happen.

Now Lawrence has that – sure. He is athletic and has great arm strength. However he’s smart. He diagnosis defenses really well. They use a lot of pre-snap movement (what Kyle Shanahan did a lot of with Matt Ryan in Atlana to huge effect). The movement forces to defense to realign (and gives the Quarterback two looks at what they are doing). That helps him guage what the defense are likely doing – allowing him to make a better decision.

You could make a case at 19 (and two years away from being allowed to declare for the draft) that Trevor Lawrence is already NFL ready.

You could make a case at 19 (and two years away from being allowed to declare for the draft) that Trevor Lawrence is already NFL ready.

Yes and some of the guys on the ESPN broadcast said that he could start for several NFL teams now.

He can’t get drafted by an NFL team until he has completed his junior year in college, which I guess is a gentleman’s agreement between the NFL and college football ( which is really a big business, more than an amateur sports league )

If Lawrence or any other young man challenged that rule in court, I think that they’d win in a minute.

Phantom – wetback and spic are certainly more derogatory, but if you Google “urban dictionary pancho” you may achieve an enlightenment that has heretofore eluded you.
Did you imagine he utilized Pancho as a term of endearment?

He can’t get drafted by an NFL team until he has completed his junior year in college, which I guess is a gentleman’s agreement between the NFL and college football ( which is really a big business, more than an amateur sports league )”

It’s also an agreement with the NFLPA. More younger players in the NFL means less older players.

You used to have a situation in the NBA were players could be drafted right out of high school. After an agreement (not so much between the NBA and the NCAA but the NBA and the NBPA) NBA teams can now only draft a guy over the age of 19 and one year removed from high school (so no longer can draft a guy straight out of high school).

An NBA player challenged the old NBA requirement (that guys had to complete 4 years in college to play in the NFL) in 1971 – recent Basketball Hall of Famer Spencer Haywood. He won.

So yeah if a college player took on the rule then he would likely win. Given the NFL’s treatment of other activists I imagine it would be a bad career move for them.

And it isn’t just the likes of Kaepernick. In 2009 the President of the NFLPA was Kevin Mawae – a multi year Pro Bowler. He was the leader of the players who were arguing for a better Collective Bargaining Agreement.

The CBA was eventually renegotiated. Mawae was a 8 time pro-bowler, a 7 time all-pro. He was one of the best players at his position.

He’s a better player than Tebow, but the equation is still the same. Kaepernick is a bigger distraction than Tebow, but also a better player than Tebow. The two probably balance out in the same way.

It is why the best solution for Kaepernick would be to sign for a coastal team – a team who’s fan base are less likely to have been opposed to his antics. So one of the LAs, the 49ers or Seattle.

Seattle seems to be the one mentioned the most – its a good fit. The fan base won’t hate him, the system suits him. The problem is that he would be a backup and he doesn’t want to be a backup. He wants to be the starter (and wants the sort of money a starter would get).

Kaepernick’s protest is not keeping him out of the NFL. Kaepernick’s ego is keeping him out of the NFL.

What will be interesting is to see how Tebow does in baseball. He played this season in the Met’s AA team – and did pretty well while doing so. He got hurt so it stalled his momentum. But if he starts next season well in the AA he likely would finish it in AAA. A good year there and maybe he gets named to the Met’s 40.

You need to be incredibly focused as a team to have a shot at winning the title. Because all teams have really good players on them, and the difference between winning a Super Bowl and not qualifying is actually very slight ( all coaches will say this )

Anyone who takes away from the focus has two strikes against him ( to mix the sports metaphor ) no matter how good he is.

In most sports the margin for error is bigger. You lose a game in baseball and that’s nothing. The best teams ever are still expected to lose 1/3 of their games. The worst teams ever are still expected to win 1/3 of their games. The margin of difference is that remaining 1/3. Which is still well over 50 games. Lose 1 of those 50 and it doesn’t make a huge mark.

In football it is different. The general spread (taking out historically very, very bad teams who lost all of their games – and taking out historically very, very good teams who won all or almost all of their games) is the worst teams are 3-13 and the best teams are 13-3. That’s 10 games difference. 10 games difference between the best and the worst. Lose 1 of those 10 and that’s a big mark on the year.

The difference between 90-72 and 89-73 in baseball is quite small. The difference between 10-6 and 9-7 is massive in football. You can’t afford to get the little things wrong, even for one game.

So if you have bad preparation because your team is distracted by a cancer in the locker room then you have a problem. If you have a bad game because your own fans are booing your quarterback then you have a problem. If the coach is spending even a little bit longer dealing with locker room nonsense – time he could be spending review game tape and coaching etc… – then you have a problem.

If, as Seamus points out, Routes A, B, C etc are closed, and other routes are opened up, won’t this also lead to a rise in the price of the drugs at Street level to cover the extra costs to the suppliers, leading to higher crime rates as addicts struggle to get the money needed to buy them? So building a wall will cause crime to rise and cost the US even more money?

You’ve certainly claimed certain motives, often conflicting ones (not that you are necessarily aware). If your motive for supporting the wall isn’t ethnic based, why make the ethnic comment? I will concede you may be in denial of your own motives.

and there you have it folks….. Mahons plays the Race Card like the braindead democrat he is. Then he accuses my of being false (that’s calling me a liar by the way his favorite ploy) and when confronted he doubles down.

When I called them south americans I got lectured, if I call them Mexicans I’ll get told they are El Salvadoran or any of the many other shit holes they are fleeing from…..

So it’s Poncho….. ya dumb yank.

And Mahons anytime you want you pick the subject. Pick one where you say I have conflicted statements on and I’ll debate you fairly, but you won’t because you’re a wuss……

If you call Mexicans South Americans you should get lectured. They are North Americans.
If you call people from El Salvador Mexicans you should get lectured, they are two different nationalities.
You have a lot of time on your hands, study a map.

Allan is a bigot, he is ridiculed and dismissed rightly so because what he says is derogatory.

Democrats, Liberals, SJW, Diversity Fanatics are also bigots. When you divide human beings by anything other sex and now you’re trying to create MORE genders, you’re a Bigot.

If you believe that certain groups need certain extra benefits you’re a bigot. You sell your bigotry in the guise of aid, a benefit for some unjust act from the past or an imagined disadvantage due to race, creed, color, or gender.

Your type of bigotry is worse than Allans.

I refuse to play that game, I was raised never judge a person by their looks or my own presumptions, but by their actions, abilities, and evidence. Trust no one, and treat everyone with a certain level of contempt until they prove otherwise.

Did you cause your illness that bankrupted you and your family Patrick? Was that your fault? Caused by your own behaiour and attitude? Or your wife’s or daughters’? No of course not. But it still cause you untold material harm.

I didn’t run to the government and say it wasn’t fair. It’s a break of life. When I was 22 I was crushed in building collapse. It took me 3 years to learn how to walk…. I didn’t ask for a handout. I learned how to adapt with my handicaps.

But in your view I could only do that because I’m white….. Bollocks is right.

You didn’t ask for handouts. Sure. But that’s not actually relevant. And you succeeded in life a certain amount because of your own endeavour but also a certain amount of luck. Not all people are as lucky.

Not everyone is given the same chances in life. So if the government can step in a level out that playing field a little why shouldn’t they?

“I didn’t run to the government and say it wasn’t fair.”

Just because you didn’t say it wasn’t fair doesn’t mean it was fair. What happened to you was not fair. And shouldn’t happen in a civilised society.

It doesn’t actually. If your father had a poor education it is harder for you to get a good one. If your father had a shit start in life then odds are you are going to have a shit start in life.

These things are traps that are very difficult to get out of.

Also worth noting that a black man was the President of the United States (I’ll disagree for what it is worth that he was the most powerful man in the world). That black man was not descended from slaves.

The first ever black President of the United States was one of the very few black men in the United States who’s ancestors were not slaves.

And they aren’t determined by race or religion. However the knock-on effect is there. If your great grandfather was a slave then likely your grandfather did a good start in life. And that likely had a knock-on effect on your father. And on you. And likely your kids.

b) Not true. Slavery wasn’t abolished until 1865. My eldest grandparent was born 72 years before I was (and 78 years before my younger sister was). So a slave born in 1865 could easily have grandchildren born in the 1920s or 1930s. You could still be alive today. I find very difficult to believe that there are no Americans today (even elderly Americans) who’s grandparents were slaves.

“There is no one alive in the US who knew an american slave.”

Again likely not true. Most elderly people would have known people who were previously slaves. The oldest person alive in the United States was born in 1905. Are you saying that no person who was a slave in 1865 was alive in 1905?

“race, creed or color had every opportunity to better their situation by the choices they made.”

So they all went to private school? They all had the opportunity to go to private school?

There would be some Americans (almost certainly very elderly) who had met slave ancestors. Then there would be others who actually lived during the Jim Crow Era in which equal opportunity for individuals of color and their communities simply didn’t exist.

It is of course one of the most fascinating stories of our nation in how many of our countrymen struggled to achieve equality and defended the ideal of an American way of life that they themselves were denied.

a) the disproportionate number of blacks in poverty predates the current trend of a greater than normal number of absent fathers.

b) most likely the rate of absent fathers is linked to poverty – caused by poverty, not the cause of poverty

Bull

First off the greatest numbers of those in poverty and on assistance are white. Blacks make up only 12% of the population. The numbers in the black community born out of wedlock however have multiplied over 100% since the creation of the Welfare State policies of LBJ.

The Welfare State specifically destroyed the black family unit. In the the fifty years these programs were enacted, poverty has not gone down one percent and out of wedlock births, school drop outs, criminal involvement, drug use, domestic abuse, and child neglect in the black community has skyrocketed and become generational.

The rate is different because the party of slavery the democrat party has continued to treat them as slaves that can’t do for themselves, but with their help and only with their help will those wrongs be righted….

Well it doesn’t work being segregated into an hyphenated group and turning the direction of your lives and culture over to those who are neither. The Proof are America’s largest cities. All with generational democrat control and the policies of race… and all failures to their minority communities…. they failed and millions have suffered from misguided policies of racial division that the democrat party is completely structured around.

It’s like many of us have met Holocaust survivors. I took my 14 y/o nephew to meet such an elderly gentleman. I asked him what advice he had for my young charge, and he said “go home and hug your mother.” I think he’ll always remember that.

David Vance Live 21.1.19. Topics. Plan B for banjaxed? Irish terrorism to stop Brexit? Native American and fake new… pscp.tv/w/bxYgbzI0OTEx…

THE PRICE OF REWARDING TERRORISM

You do not defeat terrorism by rewarding terrorists, regardless of how many bleeding heart liberals argue otherwise. Want to know where that flawed approach leads to? Read UNIONISM DECAYED 1997-2007 - It's my first book and it explains what happens when you seeek to appease terrorists and call it peace. It's available right now for ATW readers so make sure you get your copy by emailing the editor! This is the book that dissents from the herd mentality that doing wrong can lead to being right. It doesn't and this book spells out WHY.

Copyright & copy; 2010 A Tangled Web (All rights reserved).Comments on articles here are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of A Tangled Web or David Vance. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise unacceptable may be deleted by the Editor. However the fact a particular comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by David Vance of the views expressed therein.